Correct Top Tube vs. Correct Frame Size

[Booker C. Bense]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <[email protected]>,
Jim Adney <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 19:52:31 -0500 RP10128 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Should I get the correct size frame and install a very
>>short stem?
>
>That's exactly what I would recommend. To my mind, that's why stems
>are made in different reaches.
>

_ There are worse things, but either a very short or very long
stem will make the bike handling "different". You'll adapt after
a while, but IMHO top tube length is much more important that
down tube length, IF you can get the handlebars in the correct[1]
relative postion to the saddle.

I can't quite find it at the moment, but there is a fairly
interesting article about bike fit at the Hampsten bike site,
in particular it talks about the appropriate stem size for
a give size frame.

http://www.hampsten.com/index.html

_ There's lot's of other interesting stuff there as well.

_ Booker C. Bense

[1]- i.e. the one that you like best.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQuuRkmTWTAjn5N/lAQGDuwP/YBEbhgiOsBnjsKjd04NkeSBziqLrnl1h
rwb+5K8muSe6fQcDheYvJRsRQZrhv+P9RtQKC6se3XlatqUT5S3JAgRpnbZyZpJO
XBIRS91/DL1AWzokpgYfsdOcT8lP1ZLeQtgI3HFrsgtHcdwVdR7HiaMJidsCmj0F
Iv1dfpmfEJ4=
=uu8e
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <[email protected]>,
Jasper Janssen <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 04:47:12 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
> >In article <[email protected]>,
> > Jasper Janssen <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> With threaded, it's fairly easy. With threadless, not so much. 'Retaining
> >> more of the steerer tube' only goes as far as the thing was originally,
> >> after all.
> >
> >The existence of riser stems seems to be a little-known fact in
> >cycling...
>
> I wasn't talking about going up 3 or 4 inches. If you get a seriously
> mismatched frame, you're more likely going to want something like a 20 cm+
> stem.

Once you are building a non-BMX bike with an 8" rise, you are into
serious freak-show territory, threadless or not. Indeed, For a flat-bar
road or MTB that, for some reason, needed 20 cm of rise, I probably
would recommend a BMX bar.

> >But with uncut forks going for $30 and up on eBay, this isn't a big deal.
>
> As I say, 'uncut' only goes so far, and of course if you have a *good*
> fork to start with (let alone a good suspension fork), you're screwed.

Okay, look: it's possible, I suppose, for a rider to be in possession of
a frame with a close-cut (no spacers) threadless fork of some value (how
good a fork, BTW? Deal of the day seems to be a lightly used Easton EC50
going for $3.24 on eBay with 3 days left...) which, for whatever reason,
they want an 8" rise on.

How on earth did the poor rider get into that situation in the first
place? Threadless or no, if the first step to properly sizing a bike is
an 8" riser stem, you should not be the owner of that bike. I don't care
if this is the bike you were racing until you slipped a disc and that's
your excuse: I own a bike with a close-cut steerer that fits me well for
racing, and the difference between my very low boy-racer position and
the wildest fantasies of Grant "Rivendell" Pedersen is a short stem with
4" of rise. Seriously. With that on the bike, it would be comfy for my
similarly-dimensioned but non-racing father.

Jasper: have you ever seen a rider on a conventional road or MTB frame
actually using an 8" riser stem, threaded or threadless? What was their
excuse?

Of the many differently-sized regulars on this newsgroup, the only one I
can imagine who would have call for an 8" stem, even in the worst
compact-frame-in-three-sizes circumstances, would be 6'lotsa" Chalo, and
he would probably break an 8" threaded stem. He is a great breaker of
parts and a fan of threadless stems, you know...

At some point, the frame doesn't actually fit,

--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

 

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per Booker C. Bense:
>There are worse things, but either a very short or very long
>stem will make the bike handling "different".

I have a custom hard tail that I specified an extra-long top tube on - expecting
it to help keep the front wheel down.

It did, but my FS - which has an effective top tube over an inch shorter - is
even better in that respect.
--
PeteCresswell

 

[A Muzi]

>>Jasper: have you ever seen a rider on a conventional road or MTB frame
>>actually using an 8" riser stem, threaded or threadless? What was their
>>excuse?

Booker C. Bense wrote:
> _ Just to throw fuel on the fire, I've got one on my 80's MTB
> that I converted to a drop bar touring bike. It's the apparently
> no longer made SOMA threadless converter that is about 12 inches
> long. Here's a picture
> http://www.bti-usa.com/item.asp?item=SF5902&searchtype=&itemsearch=&showSec=

> Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
>>Of the many differently-sized regulars on this newsgroup, the only one I
>>can imagine who would have call for an 8" stem, even in the worst
>>compact-frame-in-three-sizes circumstances, would be 6'lotsa" Chalo, and
>>he would probably break an 8" threaded stem. He is a great breaker of
>>parts and a fan of threadless stems, you know...
>>At some point, the frame doesn't actually fit,

Booker C. Bense wrote:
> _ Well, it fit me when I bought it and with the original steel
> riser stem and flat bars it fits me. The length of that extension
> worries me a bit, but the bike is really comfortable to ride.
> I am not petite, but I am hardly Chola sized.
> _BTW, I've seen this part around on a few other converted old
> MTB bikes. You can get a similar amount of rise with a Nitto
> Periscope stem.

I'm entering this discussion late but IMHO if a dork stem
gets a guy out on his bike more often that's a good thing
right there.

Your (or my) aesthetic opinion of his bike is of secondary
import. Distant second.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <[email protected]>,
Booker C. Bense
<[email protected]> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >Jasper: have you ever seen a rider on a conventional road or MTB frame
> >actually using an 8" riser stem, threaded or threadless? What was their
> >excuse?
> >
>
> _ Just to throw fuel on the fire, I've got one on my 80's MTB
> that I converted to a drop bar touring bike. It's the apparently
> no longer made SOMA threadless converter that is about 12 inches
> long. Here's a picture
>
> http://www.bti-usa.com/item.asp?item=SF5902&searchtype=&itemsearch=&showSec=

Fire away.

> >At some point, the frame doesn't actually fit,
> >
>
> _ Well, it fit me when I bought it and with the original steel
> riser stem and flat bars it fits me. The length of that extension
> worries me a bit, but the bike is really comfortable to ride.
> I am not petite, but I am hardly Chola sized.

I may be too churlish in pointing this out, but such a change is a
pretty dramatic conversion of a bike from one use to another. So, I will
concede this: if you own an old mountain bike with the intention of
converting it to a road bike, best to have chosen one with a quill stem
.

-RjC.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

 

[[email protected]]

RP10128 wrote:
> I need a bike with a top tube of about 50.5 cm. To get a top tube of
> that length, I need to get a frame that is one or two sizes too small.
> That is, I would have to get a 49 cm. frame, whereas my inseam would
> indicate a 52 cm. frame.

Stock frames from various manufacturers have various top tube lengths.
Find a stock frame with the right top tube length you want and the
right standover height.


My LBS says that it doesn't matter that the
> frame is so small, but this strikes me as being counter-intuitive. Is
> the LBS right?

No. The LBS is not right. No properly fitting frame requires an extra
short stem or an extra long stem to fit the rider correctly. I am
pretty sure the true reasoning of the LBS is they do not represent any
frame manufacturers with the proper length top tube in the frame size
you want. So they will try to sell you the wrong frame size and
pretend to make it fit you with an inappropriately long or short stem
and seatpost.

Should I get the correct size frame and install a very
> short stem?

No. Just buy the correctly sized frame with the correct top tube
length and seat tube. You are buying new. You are not trying to make
a frame you already own fit you. You don't have to use odd stem and
seatpost lengths or rises or angles. Just find a frame with the right
top tube length and seat tube length and head tube length. Then put on
the right length stem and seatpost.

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <1n [email protected]>,
A Muzi <[email protected]> wrote:

> >>Jasper: have you ever seen a rider on a conventional road or MTB frame
> >>actually using an 8" riser stem, threaded or threadless? What was their
> >>excuse?
>
> Booker C. Bense wrote:
> > _ Just to throw fuel on the fire, I've got one on my 80's MTB
> > that I converted to a drop bar touring bike. It's the apparently
> > no longer made SOMA threadless converter that is about 12 inches
> > long. Here's a picture
> > http://www.bti-usa.com/item.asp?item=SF5902&searchtype=&itemsearch=&showSec=
>
> > Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>Of the many differently-sized regulars on this newsgroup, the only one I
> >>can imagine who would have call for an 8" stem, even in the worst
> >>compact-frame-in-three-sizes circumstances, would be 6'lotsa" Chalo, and
> >>he would probably break an 8" threaded stem. He is a great breaker of
> >>parts and a fan of threadless stems, you know...
> >>At some point, the frame doesn't actually fit,
>
> Booker C. Bense wrote:
> > _ Well, it fit me when I bought it and with the original steel
> > riser stem and flat bars it fits me. The length of that extension
> > worries me a bit, but the bike is really comfortable to ride.
> > I am not petite, but I am hardly Chola sized.
> > _BTW, I've seen this part around on a few other converted old
> > MTB bikes. You can get a similar amount of rise with a Nitto
> > Periscope stem.
>
> I'm entering this discussion late but IMHO if a dork stem
> gets a guy out on his bike more often that's a good thing
> right there.
>
> Your (or my) aesthetic opinion of his bike is of secondary
> import. Distant second.

Absolutely. Heaven help us all if my aesthetic senses determined bike
usage.

My point was that threadless stems were unlikely to be an impediment to
proper bike fit. The example I was fighting against was the idea that
someone might need an 8" stem rise.

I reiterate: if you had a bike in your possession which would only fit
you by using an 8" riser stem, then go for it. But under normal
circumstances, you aren't very likely--no, you're in the territory of
being a dramatic outlier, or (as Booker suggested) you're creatively
adapting a bike outside of its usual use.

I'm not against outlandish stems per se; they're great for certain
projects. But I don't think the failure of the market to make 8"
threadless stems widely available is a serious knock against the
threadless headset.

Actually, the same site that Booker references provides me with this
nifty item:

http://www.bti-usa.com/list.asp?cat=ST&sec=STAD&mfr=AZ&page=&reuse=1&show
Sec=0&filter=&searchtype=&showGrp=AZ011#open

3+" threadless riser. Bolt on the mutant threadless stem of your choice
from my last posting, and you're golden.

Note again that all this references the _worst_ case scenario for a
threadless setup: a close-cut fork with no spacers. Given a long enough
uncut fork, a creative person could get a threadless stem up to whatever
ridiculous height struck their fancy.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

 

[Booker C. Bense]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <[email protected]>,
Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
> Booker C. Bense
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >Jasper: have you ever seen a rider on a conventional road or MTB frame
>> >actually using an 8" riser stem, threaded or threadless? What was their
>> >excuse?
>> >
>>
>> _ Just to throw fuel on the fire, I've got one on my 80's MTB
>> that I converted to a drop bar touring bike. It's the apparently
>> no longer made SOMA threadless converter that is about 12 inches
>> long. Here's a picture
>>
>> http://www.bti-usa.com/item.asp?item=SF5902&searchtype=&itemsearch=&showSec=
>
>Fire away.

_ In poking around, I get the impression this part was actually
made as a side effect of the short lived SOMA folding bike, which
is considered by some to be one of the better attempts at
building this kind of bike. Being able to drop the bars a
foot would certainly help in making a folding bike compact.

>
>> >At some point, the frame doesn't actually fit,
>> >
>>
>> _ Well, it fit me when I bought it and with the original steel
>> riser stem and flat bars it fits me. The length of that extension
>> worries me a bit, but the bike is really comfortable to ride.
>> I am not petite, but I am hardly Chola sized.
>
>I may be too churlish in pointing this out, but such a change is a
>pretty dramatic conversion of a bike from one use to another. So, I will
>concede this: if you own an old mountain bike with the intention of
>converting it to a road bike, best to have chosen one with a quill stem
>.
>

_ Actually, if I could get a 1 inch threadless 559mm( 26" ) fork, I would
seriously consider spending the parts to switch. However, it
would likely be cheaper just to buy a Long Haul trucker frame and
move the parts over.

_ Booker C. Bense

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQu5v5mTWTAjn5N/lAQH1dgP+M+OFZOeBQ2vr/F669U3ZyPkPBH2VlkrM
FwWdqE79+huj4qpenwy4HLPlZj5WqsZ4ZdG96rQGBnug0AC28JF1d6LWyeMikCnK
SRoLhLe3vXjoYQEHyN5bSq7tD0We/PmZl1j3O/Ah9rpHehIyUZkLEiyyGVgRtlJG
Au2PttJv4no=
=IAHz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Jasper Janssen]

On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 21:27:25 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:

>Once you are building a non-BMX bike with an 8" rise, you are into
>serious freak-show territory, threadless or not. Indeed, For a flat-bar
>road or MTB that, for some reason, needed 20 cm of rise, I probably
>would recommend a BMX bar.

Okay, look, most people tend to want their bar at the height of their
saddle or a little above. Then, the problem of finding people who need 8"
stems reduces to finding people with 4-5 or so inches of exposed seatpost
(given a horizontal top tube frame, of course). That's not that hard.

Also, consider the English Roadster model: those were generally sold with
stems of 6" or so even when properly sized. Now, in a country where the
average person believes the English Roadster model is the typical bike
(and who often ride undersized versions because they're the fastest
growing nation, so secondhand bikes are all too small), try to sell
threadless-stemmed bikes. It's damned hard.

Jasper

 

[Bill Sornson]

Jasper Janssen wrote:

> Okay, look, most people tend to want their bar at the height of their
> saddle or a little above.

???

 

[Chalo]

Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>
> Of the many differently-sized regulars on this newsgroup, the only one I
> can imagine who would have call for an 8" stem, even in the worst
> compact-frame-in-three-sizes circumstances, would be 6'lotsa" Chalo, and
> he would probably break an 8" threaded stem. He is a great breaker of
> parts and a fan of threadless stems, you know...

I've deployed a couple of stems with 200mm+ extensions recently, but
they are neither threadless nor quill stems in the conventional sense.
They are both adapted from tandem stoker stems, for the purpose of
converting 25" frame touring bikes into roadsters.

One of them, a beautiful fillet-brazed steel piece from a custom
tandem, is mounted upon a special quill I machined from stainless
steel. I used extra-thick tube walls on the quill to better carry the
forces imposed by such a long stem extension. The other one is a
telescoping aluminum stoker stem I bonded solid with high-strength
Loctite and sleeved to fit a 1-1/8" threadless steerer.

That said, many quill stems have a long history of holding up well with
8" of rise to the handlebars-- they were used on BMX and freestyle
bikes up until relatively recently. Although BMX quill stems have very
short extensions, they are designed to cope with the leverage of very
high, very stiff bars. They use steel quills of a smaller than normal
diameter (21.1mm) to match the thicker-walled American standard 1"
steer tube.

Chalo Colina

 

[Chalo]

Bill Sornson wrote:
>
> Jasper Janssen wrote:
> >
> > Okay, look, most people tend to want their bar at the height of their
> > saddle or a little above.
>
> ???

Jasper is Dutch IIRC. Holland is one of those places in the world
where most people use bikes for transportation, like to be comfortable
on their bikes, and don't see the need to wear dayglo product
advertisements or ridiculous plastic beanies when they ride. Hence the
handlebar placement similar to the worldwide average.

Chalo Colina

 

[Bill Sornson]

Chalo wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>
>> Jasper Janssen wrote:
>>>
>>> Okay, look, most people tend to want their bar at the height of
>>> their saddle or a little above.
>>
>> ???
>
> Jasper is Dutch IIRC. Holland is one of those places in the world
> where most people use bikes for transportation, like to be comfortable
> on their bikes, and don't see the need to wear dayglo product
> advertisements or ridiculous plastic beanies when they ride. Hence
> the handlebar placement similar to the worldwide average.

Right. I just question the "univeral most". Might be a close call overall?
(Almost every road bike and nearly all mountain bikes that I've seen have
grips below saddle level.)

I guess if we include little Billy Baka on that 45-mph trike...

:-D

 

[Booker C. Bense]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <[email protected]>,
Bill Sornson <[email protected]> wrote:
>Chalo wrote:
>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>>
>>> Jasper Janssen wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Okay, look, most people tend to want their bar at the height of
>>>> their saddle or a little above.
>>>
>>> ???
>>
>> Jasper is Dutch IIRC. Holland is one of those places in the world
>> where most people use bikes for transportation, like to be comfortable
>> on their bikes, and don't see the need to wear dayglo product
>> advertisements or ridiculous plastic beanies when they ride. Hence
>> the handlebar placement similar to the worldwide average.
>
>Right. I just question the "univeral most". Might be a close call overall?
>(Almost every road bike and nearly all mountain bikes that I've seen have
>grips below saddle level.)
>

_ This is the American standard and makes the bike look quite
racy in the garage where generally spends all it's time after the
first 3 months or so....

_ Booker C. Bense



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQu+WPmTWTAjn5N/lAQFRrwP9FJbL3jbrEHUZpLIj3NdrGcJzX3EuFWcT
g4Eg37bdRrNgMxfG0qqix/7vUcYqC86Eu1xhLRWgJOy2vazldHwpfbznnnP7s6l/
Z4i/O1Egm9uhUDghdCAV9tYnuf5IFNgTDlABirOZngZId+EhtFbeyD6HWgAfo3Dx
Ybx7SIUMFt8=
=NcpQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Bill Sornson]

Booker C. Bense wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Bill Sornson <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Chalo wrote:
>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Jasper Janssen wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Okay, look, most people tend to want their bar at the height of
>>>>> their saddle or a little above.
>>>>
>>>> ???
>>>
>>> Jasper is Dutch IIRC. Holland is one of those places in the world
>>> where most people use bikes for transportation, like to be
>>> comfortable on their bikes, and don't see the need to wear dayglo
>>> product advertisements or ridiculous plastic beanies when they
>>> ride. Hence the handlebar placement similar to the worldwide
>>> average.
>>
>> Right. I just question the "univeral most". Might be a close call
>> overall? (Almost every road bike and nearly all mountain bikes that
>> I've seen have grips below saddle level.)
>>
>
> _ This is the American standard and makes the bike look quite
> racy in the garage where generally spends all it's time after the
> first 3 months or so....

None of the bikes I see on the road or on trails has been in a garage at the
time.

 

[Jasper Janssen]

On 1 Aug 2005 18:27:25 -0700, "Chalo" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Jasper is Dutch IIRC. Holland is one of those places in the world
>where most people use bikes for transportation, like to be comfortable
>on their bikes, and don't see the need to wear dayglo product
>advertisements or ridiculous plastic beanies when they ride. Hence the
>handlebar placement similar to the worldwide average.

And even without that, if you look at this newsgroup, everybody who posts
that they've actually experimented with an open mind seems to be saying
bars at about saddle height. Rarely if ever do you see someone claiming
that after lengthy deliberation and trial and error they have decided to
have their bars 4 inches below the seat. I also see a fair amount of posts
saying "my bike has the bars 3 or 4 inches below the seat and I want to
get it up. Help! Am I allowed to perform such a sacriligious act?".

Jasper

 

[Jasper Janssen]

On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 18:08:20 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:

>Note again that all this references the _worst_ case scenario for a
>threadless setup: a close-cut fork with no spacers. Given a long enough
>uncut fork, a creative person could get a threadless stem up to whatever
>ridiculous height struck their fancy.

Well, yes, but my point was that with threaded, you only need an
outlandish quill, if you ever need to change the bar positioning in
whatever weird way. That's *MUCH* freakin' easier than getting a new rigid
fork with a very long uncut steerer, and for suspension forks it's pretty
much a financial impossibility altogether.

Jasper

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 00:52:05 GMT, Jasper Janssen <[email protected]>
wrote:

>And even without that, if you look at this newsgroup, everybody who posts
>that they've actually experimented with an open mind seems to be saying
>bars at about saddle height.

My bars have been just under 4 inches below my seat for years. I used
to have them a little higher and lower is better. It's been that way
mainly since I race, but I used the same setup for commuting and daily
errands and even to ride across the US. THe only time higher bars
worked for me was when I was a messenger many years ago.

One data point.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

 

[Mark Hickey]

Jasper Janssen <[email protected]> wrote:

>On 1 Aug 2005 18:27:25 -0700, "Chalo" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Jasper is Dutch IIRC. Holland is one of those places in the world
>>where most people use bikes for transportation, like to be comfortable
>>on their bikes, and don't see the need to wear dayglo product
>>advertisements or ridiculous plastic beanies when they ride. Hence the
>>handlebar placement similar to the worldwide average.
>
>And even without that, if you look at this newsgroup, everybody who posts
>that they've actually experimented with an open mind seems to be saying
>bars at about saddle height. Rarely if ever do you see someone claiming
>that after lengthy deliberation and trial and error they have decided to
>have their bars 4 inches below the seat. I also see a fair amount of posts
>saying "my bike has the bars 3 or 4 inches below the seat and I want to
>get it up. Help! Am I allowed to perform such a sacriligious act?".

As much as it pains me to disagree with JT, my road bike bars have
always been more than 4" below the saddle as well. It's not THAT
unusual.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 21:34:01 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 00:52:05 GMT, Jasper Janssen <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>And even without that, if you look at this newsgroup, everybody who posts
>>that they've actually experimented with an open mind seems to be saying
>>bars at about saddle height.
>
>My bars have been just under 4 inches below my seat for years. I used
>to have them a little higher and lower is better. It's been that way
>mainly since I race, but I used the same setup for commuting and daily
>errands and even to ride across the US. THe only time higher bars
>worked for me was when I was a messenger many years ago.
>
>One data point.

Pardon my replying to my own post, but actually my bars were a little
lower than described above -- between 9 to 12cm below the seat and
usually just over 10.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************